this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
84 points (94.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

37787 readers
2690 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Is it because alcohol, tobacco, and firearms also have legal pathways? So they spend time tracking down cheats and checking/enforcing regulations?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So many gun laws are just fucking stupid. Tons of stuff is banned because it looks scary.

SBRs being illegal is pretty dumb.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Brother, I can talk dumb and ineffective gun laws all night long without repeating myself.

Problem is that people, of any political persuasion, don't get the notion of political capital. I rant about it a lot. :)

No matter how right you think you are, no matter how scientifically valid your reasoning, no matter how sensible, no matter what, making laws costs goodwill. Decisions cost votes. And votes determine one's ability to stay in office and effect the sorts of changes one, and hopefully, their constituents want.

Knowing that and factoring it in is what politicians need to be doing. FFS, this is high school Government 101.

Guns for example:

"We want a 'high capacity' mag ban!"

Well, none of that works like you think. High cap mags jam, the military won't even use 'em, only mass shooter idiots, and I'd rather their shit jam. Besides, swapping a mag is trivial for a shooter, 4-seconds if he sucks. Can we talk about it?

"Children! Safety! WANT!"

OK, it's gotta cost voters, and cost you a chance to make real changes.

"WANT!"

tl;dr If the Democrats had brains enough to read the room, they'd drop the non-stop gun ban shit, take the issue back from the assholes, gain all those single-issue voters and sweep the polls everywhere.

"WANT!!!"

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They just change the definitions when it suits them.

High capacity used to be the big 50-100 round mags. Now when they say “high capacity” they mean standard capacity 30 round or even smaller. Plenty of places ban anything over 10 or 15.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, because there's no legitimate self-defense purpose to load more than 10 rounds. If you can't do it in 10, you can't do it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

So I have no idea about guns but would you say there is no legislative way to end the fact that the USA is the only first world country with a mass shooting like every other day?

Again I am not arguing for or against any one particular measure or ban.
I don't know anything about high cap mags or whatever.
But I do know that other countries seem to show a correlation between stricter gun laws and less fatalities by gun.

Or is it your 2nd amendment that stands in the way of effective legislative measures?

It just seems like a problem that should be so easy to solve and as a European it just seems strange that you guys seem to be completely unable to even make improvements.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

other countries seem to show a correlation between stricter gun laws and less fatalities by gun.

Other countries have universal healthcare and functioning social services. I suspect there's a stronger correlation between those things and lower levels of violence of all types.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I think the issue here is that lawmakers don't know enough about guns to write laws to regulate them effectively. They just ban things that sound dangerous because it makes it look like they're doing things without actually having to do things.

Republicans have a legitimate argument that Democrat gun control laws are fucking stupid, and Democrats have a legitimate argument that we need more gun control. Most of us just sit here wishing you can be allowed to own a gun, but not buy a fucking assault rifle from some random dickhead at at a gun fair.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It would require a constitutional amendment to outright ban guns, and our Congress can't agree on year to year budgeting. Getting the required votes to ban guns would be functionally impossible. Honestly even if it didn't require an amendment I don't think it would be realistically passed as a regular law.

So: banning guns outright is off the table entirely.

More gun controls always seemed to be approached in an incredibly stupid way- they tend to ban the scary things rather than the dangerous things.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When kept separate from a receiver, it's perfectly legal, they're just gun parts. So just make sure you travel with it in pieces and only shoot with friends out in nature